Hi there community,
I'm wondering whether there'd be interest to participate in a game not unlike Republic Reborn (http://www.thecbg.org/index.php/topic,210146.html) (in style) set in either Siam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Thailand) (Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Burma) or Aztec (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec) (Mexico). I have a preference for Siam, but in the end it'd depend on who's interested.
I'm weighting the options for the players to adopt the role of local lords, county-level lords or royal lords. The game would play itself out season by season like Polycarp's game, and you'd have to interact with the PC or NPC lords around you, either in allied or enemy fashion (whatever your goals are) and there'd be events popping up in your own demesne to either cripple or boost you. It'd be a living world.
It would be totally ahistorical. Our modern knowledge of both civilizations is greatly limited, so I'd use what I can but for whatever that lies between story-telling and roleplaying would do the rest.
Holy shit, if you run a political Aztec game then I
Both sound extremely interesting but a political Aztec game would be outstanding.
In an Aztec game, the players would be Tlatoani, a ''speaker'' (which can be translated into king) and rule over a altepetl, a city-state. There doesn't seem to be any rule that says a Tlatoani is limited to ruling only one altepetl, so he could rule over several altepetl.
A Tlatoani title was inherited by a member of the ruler's (or recently deceased ruler's) dynasty through election by a council of elders. Since a Tlatoani could have several wives, his offspring would be numerous and in constant competition. This creates good opportunities for roleplaying internal turmoil event.
Quote from: Magnus PymSince a Tlatoani could have several wives, his offspring would be numerous and in constant competition.
I assume that the amount of plotting and scheming among the wives this would create, and it being ahistorical anyway, means female characters would be no problem.
I was actually going to invite you, sparkle, knowing that all that would hold you back would be not being able to play a female character.
I dug a bit and found that there have been actual female rulers in mesoamerica, and the aztecs more particularly. So you wouldn't have to play alongside another PC lord, you could outright play your own female lord.
Since historical accuracy isn't really a thing, is the Aztec Empire going to avoid it's untimely destruction?
I'm going to find a timeline that will not be affected by the Conquests. So it's unlikely, and likely that the Aztec Empire will be strong. It remains to be seen.
Quote from: Magnus Pymall that would hold you back would be not being able to play a female character
That is a big thing, yes. :)
Quote from: Magnus PymSo you wouldn't have to play alongside another PC lord, you could outright play your own female lord.
Oh, that could be fun too. Although I do have to admit that I had fun in Underdeep being an allied faction/thorn in someone's side. In terms of game balance, if someone wanted to start with a more powerful or eminent state, they could essentially "combine" their starting capital with mine, but they'd have to deal with me.
Also, since you mentioned it was your preference but it otherwise hadn't been brought up, due to talking about the Aztec thing, I'm also interested in a Siam/SE Asian setting as well.
Alright thanks. I'll keep this up and see if more people want to join. If yes then I'll shake this up soon-ish.